Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU Human–Wildlife Interactions Monographs Berryman Institute 2018 Human–Black Bear Conflicts: A Review of Common Management Practices Carl W. Lackey Nevada Department of Wildlife, [email protected] Stewart W. Breck USDA/APHIS/WS National Wildlife Research Center, [email protected] Brian F. Wakeling Nevada Department of Wildlife, [email protected] H. Bryant White Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/hwi_monographs Part of the Animal Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Lackey, C. W., S. W. Breck, B. F. Wakeling, and B. White. 2018. Human-Black Bear Conflicts: A er view of common management practices. Human-Widlife Interactions Monograph 2:1-68. This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Berryman Institute at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Human–Wildlife Interactions Monographs by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HUMAN–BLACK BEAR CONFLICTS A REVIEW OF COMMON MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Carl W. Lackey Stewart W. Breck Brian F. Wakeling Bryant White HUMAN-WILDLIFE INTERACTIONS MONOGRAPH NUMBER 2 Human-Wildlife Interactions: Monograph 2. A publication of the Jack H. Berryman Institute Press, Wildland Resources Department, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, USA. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are indebted to a large number of people and organizations for their support of this publication and their assistance in bringing it to fruition, including Richard Beausoleil (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife), Jeremy Hurst (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation), and Carole Stanko (New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife). We would also like to thank Reid DeWalt, Mark Vieira, Melanie Kaknes, Casey Westbrook (Colorado Parks and Wildlife), Heather Reich (Nevada Department of Wildlife), and Tom Decker (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) for reviewing this document. This document was requested, reviewed, and endorsed by the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA). Significant portions of this document were drawn with permission from the North East Black Bear Technical Committee’s 2012 document, An Evaluation of Black Bear Management Options (Hurst et al. 2012), which in turn drew upon several state and provincial black bear management plans across North America. We express our gratitude to all fellow bear managers in North America for their willingness to share this valuable information. Members of the AFWA ad hoc Human–Black Bear Conflicts Task Force include: Richard Beausoleil (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife), Stewart W. Breck (USDA-WS-National Wildlife Research Center), Michael Boudreau (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources), Maria Davidson (Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries), Jeremy Hurst (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation), Carl W. Lackey (Nevada Department of Wildlife), Dave McFarland (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources), Colleen Olfenbuttel (North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission), Harry Spiker (Maryland Department of Natural Resources), Carole Stanko (New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife), Emma Vost (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources), Brian Wakeling (Nevada Department of Wildlife) and Bryant White (Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies). We thank the Jack H. Berryman Institute (BI), Utah State University, for editorial, design, and publication support. Dr. Michael Conover was key to this guide being published as the Editor of the BI Monograph series of the journal, Human–Wildlife Interactions. We acknowledge the comments provided by Dr. Conover and three anonymous reviewers which greatly improved the monograph. We could not have possibly produced this document without the able assistance of Terry A. Messmer, BI Director, Rae Ann Hart, BI Staff Associate, and Annie Christensen, PDP Designer, who speared the final publication layout and design process. Their generous sharing of time and expertise added immeasurably to the accuracy and completeness of this publication. Funding for the publication of the monograph was provided by Nevada Department of Wildlife, AFWA, U.S.D.A. Wildlife Services, and the BI. THIS PROJECT WAS SUPPORTED by Wildlife Resotration funds, through grants administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration: Partnering to fund conservation and connect people with nature. The mention of commercial products in this publication is for the reader’s convenience and is not intended as an endorsement of those products nor discrimination against similar products not mentioned. This publication should be cited as: Lackey, C.W., S.W. Breck, B.F. Wakeling, and B. White. 2018. Human–Black Bear Conflicts: A review of common management practices. Human–Wildlife Interactions Monograph 2:1-68. Cover photos provided by 9caribou.com (top), Jim Nelson (middle-left), Wildlife Conservation Society (middle-center), John T. Humphrey AKAwolf.com (middle-right), and Published by the Berryman Institute Hurst et al. 2012 (bottom-right). Logan, UT Design and Layout by PDP at Utah State University CONTENTS Acknowledgments Abstract 1 Introduction 4 The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and Human–Bear Conflicts ................... 6 “I Hold the Smoking Gun” by Chris Parmeter ............................................................................ 8 Status of the American Black Bear 9 Status of Human–Bear Conflicts 13 Quantifying Conflicts .................................................................................................................. 15 Definition of Terms Associated with Human–Bear Management .............................................. 15 Methods to Address Human–Bear Conflicts 18 Public Education ......................................................................................................................... 19 Law and Ordinance Enforcement ............................................................................................... 22 Exclusionary Methods ................................................................................................................ 23 Capture and Release ................................................................................................................... 27 Aversive Conditioning ................................................................................................................ 31 Repellents ................................................................................................................................... 37 Damage Compensation Programs ............................................................................................. 38 Supplemental and Diversionary Feeding ................................................................................... 40 Depredation (Kill) Permits ......................................................................................................... 42 Management Bears (Agency Kill) .............................................................................................. 43 Privatized Conflict Management ................................................................................................ 44 Population Management 45 Regulated Hunting and Trapping ................................................................................................ 46 Control of Non-Hunting Mortality .............................................................................................. 49 Fertility Control ........................................................................................................................... 51 Habitat Management ................................................................................................................... 53 No Population Intervention ......................................................................................................... 55 Research Needs 57 Agency Policy 58 Literature Cited 59 1 “Human–Black Bear conflicts are ABSTRACT analogous to heart disease. We all know that prevention is crucial, Most human–black bear (Ursus americanus) conflict but too many people wait until the occurs when people make anthropogenic foods like garbage, dog symptoms become a problem to food, domestic poultry, or fruit trees available to bears. Bears take action and by then it’s too change their behavior to take advantage of these resources and late.” may damage property or cause public safety concerns in the process. Managers are often forced to focus efforts on reactive Rich Beausoleil non-lethal and lethal bear management techniques to solve Washington Department of immediate problems, which do little to address root causes Fish and Wildlife of human–bear conflict. As long as bears find easy access to garbage, bird feeders, urban fruit trees, and other food subsidies, conflicts are likely to continue. Managers and the public need to understand the available tools to stop human–bear conflict and reduce effects on bear populations. Rhetorically blaming bears for conflicts by labeling them as problem bears or nuisance bears is becoming increasing unpopular. Ultimately human behavior must change by reducing anthropogenic resources that cause human– bear conflicts. This process requires a different suite of tools and should be the primary focus for bear managers interested in lowering the potential for conflict. Our objective